Less Civilized Factions

[Macilrille]

That's an interesting take-on on the subject, even if too slightly Classicist. In my view, primeval societies always had that "heroic" emphasis; compare Medieval Europe with the Celts for example. Both had a fierce warrior ethos which had almost constant emphasis on the individual feats of glory and all the like.

Yet this seems to convene the idea that both periods had an essentially undisciplined mob passing for an army. Both the Celts and later Medieval armies (as well as the early Homeric Greeks) had a developed notion of collective warfare and even collective glory, it was just seen as "honourable" and fit to let strong warriors take the initiative sometimes. This all changes in a "later" period: the Hoplite (which was a soldier forfeiting all personal glory for formation work) replaces old Homeric warfare, while in Europe the old knightly ethos crumbled in favour of mass mercenary armies, although it did survive for much longer in one or other aspect (the systematic practice and organization of duels being one of them). Celtic society might have benefited from a similar shift if they hadn't been erased from the map all too early - most of the old elites were almost dead, and so on.

This is my view, and the general idea is accepted by most historians and sociologists. Sociologists especially likes neat models covering all societies. Harste has written extensively on the matter based on Luhman's models of Autopoietic Systems.

kekailoa, the socalled scholars claiming that the Cimbrii and Teutons were Celts are hardly unbiased "Uni of Wales, one of the few remaining Celtic bastions...), in fact Celtic historians shows the same trend as nationalist Germanic and Nordic ones did 100- 150 years ago of wanting to include their own people in any major barbaric and heroic event of antiquity. The Cimbrii and Teutons were from Jutland and the area immediately s of it.
However:
->Their culture was influenced by Celts (from Balcans to France, the Gunnestrup Cauldron is mixed Thracian-Celtic in origin, other cauldrons and the wagon finds are Gallic), just as it was later influenced by Rome when the Romans expanded to become a power, and got close.
->It is unlikely that the entire population left Jutland to relocate, archeology does not show any large decrease in population and in the nature of later migrations (up to Viking ones and the Crusades), it is more likely that only a part of the population went. My own theory is that just like the Vikings, only warriors went, led by charismatic warlords and perhaps with some family and camp followers. These then picked up many followers, hangers-on, camp followers, etc in the land they journeyed through. Including entire tribes, mostly Germanic, but some Celts as well, and since much of the areas travelled through was Celtic, many wifes and camp followers would be Celtic in origin just as many of the original fighters would leave and new ones join (even from back home- like Vikings and Crusaders). Thus creating a mix of culture and bloodlines. The armies that fought the Romans would probably have been Jute-ish at the core, Germanic in nature, but influenced and to some extent full of Celts and half-Celts. But to make them Celtic tribes is a bit far-fetched (I am not saying you are doing that, but many Celt-lovers- especially online- do).

As for Ariovistus, he lead the Suebi confederation, which was by and large made up of Germanic tribes, only the Marcomanni and possibly the Hermanduri would have been in any way of the mixed German-Celtic from the Rhine- Bohemia areas where that mixed culture existed. In fact at least one of his allied tribes was from as far away as Jutland; the Haerudi. But then again, Tacitus mentions the seven tribes of Jutland as part of the Suebi.

[kekailoa]

kekailoa, the socalled scholars claiming that the Cimbrii and Teutons were Celts are hardly unbiased "Uni of Wales, one of the few remaining Celtic bastions...), in fact Celtic historians shows the same trend as nationalist Germanic and Nordic ones did 100- 150 years ago of wanting to include their own people in any major barbaric and heroic event of antiquity. The Cimbrii and Teutons were from Jutland and the area immediately s of it.
However:
->Their culture was influenced by Celts (from Balcans to France, the Gunnestrup Cauldron is mixed Thracian-Celtic in origin, other cauldrons and the wagon finds are Gallic), just as it was later influenced by Rome when the Romans expanded to become a power, and got close.
->It is unlikely that the entire population left Jutland to relocate, archeology does not show any large decrease in population and in the nature of later migrations (up to Viking ones and the Crusades), it is more likely that only a part of the population went. My own theory is that just like the Vikings, only warriors went, led by charismatic warlords and perhaps with some family and camp followers. These then picked up many followers, hangers-on, camp followers, etc in the land they journeyed through. Including entire tribes, mostly Germanic, but some Celts as well, and since much of the areas travelled through was Celtic, many wifes and camp followers would be Celtic in origin just as many of the original fighters would leave and new ones join (even from back home- like Vikings and Crusaders). Thus creating a mix of culture and bloodlines. The armies that fought the Romans would probably have been Jute-ish at the core, Germanic in nature, but influenced and to some extent full of Celts and half-Celts. But to make them Celtic tribes is a bit far-fetched (I am not saying you are doing that, but many Celt-lovers- especially online- do).

As for Ariovistus, he lead the Suebi confederation, which was by and large made up of Germanic tribes, only the Marcomanni and possibly the Hermanduri would have been in any way of the mixed German-Celtic from the Rhine- Bohemia areas where that mixed culture existed. In fact at least one of his allied tribes was from as far away as Jutland; the Haerudi. But then again, Tacitus mentions the seven tribes of Jutland as part of the Suebi.

No, I agree. The invading Cimbrii and Teutones were most definitely Germanic in origin and nature, but what I was trying to say is that portions of the horde were most likely Celtic, proving that yes, the Celts could fight. They could stand in pitched battles against civilized troops and hold their own, and seeing as they were a part of the hordes that ran roughshod all over Roman territory, I would call that proof. And I agree, some Celtophiles can be a little much. (Even though I really used to be one...)